The thinking behind the England World Cup squad - Blair McPherson

The build-up to a World Cup is always accompanied by excitement, hope and endless speculation. Fans debate the manager’s selections. Players dream of their moment on the biggest stage. Expectations rise long before a ball is kicked.

When the England manager announced his squad, there were the usual discussions about who was in and who had been left out. But what caught my attention was not who he selected. It was how he explained his thinking.

He made it clear that some players would not play. They were there as cover for injury, suspension or illness. Every squad needs backups.

What was unusual was his openness about it.

He said he wanted players who would contribute positively even if they never got onto the pitch. Players who would support teammates, help create the right atmosphere and remain committed despite the likelihood of spending most of the tournament on the bench.

In effect, he was selecting not only for talent but for emotional maturity.

He understood that success would depend partly on how those who were not chosen reacted to being overlooked.

That is a lesson many organisations have yet to learn.

Most organisations invest considerable time and effort identifying high-potential employees. Talent programmes, succession plans and leadership development initiatives are all designed to identify future leaders and key contributors.

But far less attention is paid to a different group.

Those who were considered good enough to be included, but not good enough to be chosen.

The deputy who misses out on promotion.

The manager not selected to lead the strategic project.

The ambitious employee who sees someone else identified as a future leader.

The experienced specialist overlooked in favour of a newer colleague.

These people are often among the organisation’s most capable employees.

They are also among its greatest retention risks.

At first there is hope.

Hope of recognition. Hope of progression. Hope of being noticed.

Then comes disappointment.

Not the disappointment of failure. The disappointment of being passed over.

For many organisations, this is where the talent conversation ends. Attention shifts to the successful candidate. The promotion is announced. The leadership programme begins. The successor is identified.

But for those not selected, the emotional journey is only just beginning.

The difficult part is not losing out.

The difficult part is continuing to support the person selected ahead of you.

Disappointment rarely arrives on its own. It is usually accompanied by comparison.

Why them?

Why not me?

What did they see in that person that they didn’t see in me?

If these questions remain unanswered, disappointment can become envy. Envy can harden into resentment.

At that point employees may remain productive. They may continue to attend meetings, meet deadlines and fulfil their responsibilities.

But something important changes.

The discretionary effort disappears.

The willingness to go the extra mile declines.

The emotional commitment to the organisation begins to weaken.

Eventually some leave. Others stay but disengage.

Neither outcome is good for the organisation.

This is why talent management should not focus solely on those identified as future leaders. It should also consider the experience of those who were not selected.

The England manager appeared to recognise this. He knew that talented people sitting on the bench would still influence the team’s performance. Morale, relationships and team culture would all be shaped by how they responded to disappointment.

The same is true in organisations.

Research consistently highlights the importance of employee engagement, psychological safety and organisational culture. Yet these are often discussed as collective concepts.

In practice, they are experienced individually.

Culture is shaped by thousands of personal experiences of recognition, exclusion, success and disappointment.

HR professionals cannot eliminate disappointment from organisational life. Nor should they try. Promotions, appointments and development opportunities will always involve difficult choices.

What they can do is pay more attention to what happens afterwards.

How are decisions explained?

How are expectations managed?

What support is offered to those who miss out?

How quickly does attention move on from those not selected?

The answers matter.

Organisations invest heavily in identifying talent.

They spend far less time thinking about what happens to talented people who are repeatedly overlooked.

Yet the future health of the organisation may depend as much on retaining the commitment of those who are not chosen as developing those who are.